Smile and Walk Away Negotiation Strategy

One of the best negotiation strategies you have when negotiating over the price of something is to get up and prepare to leave while saying, “Thanks for everything, but I’m not interested in the terms of this deal.” You may also say something like, “This deal is not for me,” or “I just can’t do it at that price.” Say this with a smile, shake their hand, and wish them all the best as you prepare to leave.

Never put yourself in a position where you can’t walk away. Don’t fall in love with a product or service. If the seller knows you “must have it,” it will be much more difficult for you to negotiate the best price. If you can stay emotionally detached from your deals, you will be able to make smarter, more rational decisions.

The key is to be able to walk away on good terms. If you explode with a barrage of expletives and storm out slamming the door at the “outrageous prices,” or something similar, you will have closed off future negotiations with this seller. If you smile, wish them the best, and leave on good terms, you have not closed the door to future negotiations. Keep a positive attitude and don’t get personal. It’s just business.

I used this the last time I purchased a car. I had the absolute rock bottom lowest price sitting before me after having several changes in price and interest rate already. And in fact, I had a deal that was in my range of acceptance and that was a good deal on the car sitting in front of me. However, I wanted to try and get a bit better. I stood up, told the salesperson that I appreciated his time and what he offered, but it just wasn’t good enough for us to buy the car. I then told my wife we should leave. And we did! We shook hands, took his card, and left.

We drove down the street a ways and pulled into a parking lot where we could talk. We discussed that the price they came down to was pretty good according to the research we had done on the vehicle before that day. They also had lowered the interest rate to a rate just below the best our personal bank was offering on the same auto loans. Over all, it was a pretty good deal and we would not get much better. We waited about 30 minutes and I called the salesman from my cell phone. I told him that we really liked the vehicle, and if he could just help us out by coming down a bit more we might be able to make the deal work. He said he could come down another $500.00. (Earlier, before we walked, he told us they couldn’t come down any lower.) I told him if he would do that we would go back to the dealership and buy the car. A couple hours later we were driving our new car home.

So remember, don’t become too attached and be prepared to walk away. If you do walk, smile and walk away on good terms. Smiling and walking away just might help you get the deal you want.

Answering the Question ‘What changed your view on the mainstream wrestling companies, past companies or newly exposed companies?’

I thought I’d post this question from Samoan Roots since a lot of people seem to be asking it lately:

The reason why I’m asking this is because I’ve noticed a variety of fans with different views and opinions. Some of them will say “wrestling isn’t the same as it was compared to the WCW, ECW and NWA days”. While some others will say “wrestling should be more like ROH, Dragon Gate USA, CHIKARA and etc”. The question is what has changed your view on the current mainstream wrestling companies, past promotions or the new exposed promotions? BQ – I remember seeing how some WWE fans moved on to TNA around 2004 or 2005 because TNA stood out and were doing things that WWE weren’t offering to the fans. Currently, I’m seeing how both WWE and TNA are on the same boat and how Independent Promotions are starting to stand out more because of the wrestling aspect. This is based on most people I’ve talked to or heard from, which leads to the next question. Does this prove that the mainstream companies should start capitalizing on the in-ring product? Also, if the WWE were to adapt the wrestling style of the Independent Promotions post-Attitude Era – present time, would they still be successful as they currently are or even more successful?All brief or detailed answers are appreciated and helpful.
Answer: What changed my views on mainstream wrestling was the man who killed pro wrestling and replaced it with that mainstream “sports entertainment” crap.Vince McMahon pushes gimmicks, cartoon characters, melodramatic storylines, skits, long and unnecessary pyro-filled entrances, performers based on how many T-shirts they sell, catchphrases, pretty faces, overly-muscled steroid bodies, and the same 5-6 performers year after year…in short, everything EXCEPT wrestling talent.You can’t eliminate “showmanship” from pro wrestling or it becomes amateur wrestling, and to most people amateur wrestling is boring to watch. But Vince McMahon has shoved the wrestling match (and wrestling talent) far to the back, in favor of melodrama and pyro. He has removed wrestling skills from the shows and replaced it with a loud light-show full of cartoon characters who’s every action (and even dialogue) is so predictable that any of us could write it at least as effective as Vince’s crayon-wielders.There is a reason Vince removed the word “wrestling” from the “WWE universe” — there is very little wrestling left. The vast majority of WWE “sports entertainers” “wrestle” the same match, the same style. Even newcomers who do have different styles eventually conform to the “WWE style” and become just another “sports entertainer”, pushes dependent on T-shirt sales, not wrestling talent.TNA is following this same business model. T-shirt sales are becoming more important than wrestling skills. TNA, too, is devolving into the “if you can’t dazzle them with science then baffle them with b*llshit” philosophy of blinding the fans with light shows, loud music, and melodrama to disguise the fact that the substance ain’t there any more. TNA still offers much better quality wrestling than the WWE, but it’s only a matter of time before there will be no difference between them.Promotions such as CMLL and AAA in Mexico, NOAH in Japan, ROH and DragonGate in the U.S. prove that there is a market for highly-skilled wrestlers who can combine stellar wrestling matches with entertaining gimmicks to draw in the paying customers. They prove that sappy melodrama and backstage skits are not needed to have an entertaining wrestling show that gives you value for your dollar.BQ: No. Most “mainstream” wrestling fans are not what JR would describe as “students of the game”. They really aren’t very interested in watching two skilled “technicians” exchanging holds and trying to out-wrestle each other. Hence, the “boring” chants when the guys DO wrestle. They just want the guys to “fight” once in a while, maybe throw in a huracanrana or a DDT now and then to keep up the illusion that they are “wrestling”. Punching and kicking for several minutes, followed by Sweet Chin Music, an RKO, a Swanton Bomb, a Spear, that’s all the “mainstream” fans really want in-between the flashy entrances and melodrama. A Bryan Danielson vs KENTA -style “clinic” would bore them to tears.It’s too late for Vince to “re-train” the fans into wanting the Danielson – KENTA type matches. He’s spent over two decades training them to want the Cena – Orton type brawls (WE in this section may complain about the same old same old, but the average fan doesn’t, and Vince produces his shows for THEM, not us). If Vince were to shift his product to emphasize wrestling skills and “technical” matches (as ROH does) the “mainstream” fans would stop watching. TNA, on the other hand, would benefit from offering up better wrestling matches to make them distinct from the WWE. Longtime TNA fans aren’t exactly happy with TNA’s shift to a more WWE-like product.

Negotiate Successfully by Using Debating Techniques

In the last negotiation lesson, I expounded on the benefits that proper positioning has and the role it plays, before, during, and after negotiating. This lesson expands upon that theory and takes into account how any negotiator can enhance the outcome of a negotiation by using a few debating techniques.

Positioning:

First, I’d like to cite an experience I encountered at a conference at which I recently spoke. There was a very powerful speaker who spoke on the topic of leadership. I heard him speak in the past, but this time I was moved by his words to the point that I wanted to purchase the DVD set he offered for the continuation of the expansion of one’s mind. As luck would have it, a lady in front of me purchased the last set. She heard me exclaim how I couldn’t believe the bad luck I had to miss purchasing the set. Then, this well poised and well spoken women, turned to me and said, ‘you can have it’. I looked at her suspiciously for about 30 seconds and in my mind, I was wondering what she might want in return (read between the lines if you wish. she had already paid for the set and she was giving it to me for free). It was as though she read my mind when she said, ‘there are no strings attached’. She gave me her contact information and said I could send the set to her after I’d listened to it. As it turned out, this woman whose name is Tori really didn’t want anything in return, but due to her generosity, I’ll assist her in her endeavors in the future.

In the above example of positioning, Tori was not seeking anything from me, but think of what you can do before entering into a negotiation that can endear you to whom you’re negotiating.

After you endear yourself, how can you utilize debating techniques to enhance your negotiation position? The following are a few debating techniques and how they are related to negotiation tactics and strategies.

Debating Techniques:

When debating and negotiating, there are certain principles you should follow …

Clarity: When debating, you should understand the argument.

When you negotiate, you should always confirm your understanding of why you’re negotiating. You should also confirm the other person’s understanding, and get their perception, of what is being negotiated; the reason for doing so is to make sure everyone involved in the negotiation is ‘on the same page’.

Accuracy: When debating, you need to ask yourself if what you hear is true and can it be proven.

When you negotiate, you should at a minimum, mentally question the validity of information presented to you. You should also observe the body language and manner in which information is presented. If you observe the body language of the person you’re negotiation with, you could discern hidden or additional information in the message.

Precision: When debating vague assertions can be assumed to be true until exceptions disprove them.

When you negotiate, if the person’s words that you’re negotiating with are not synchronized with their body language, you can allow the person to continue to unveil their method of ‘bending the truth’ to the point that you’ve gathered enough knowledge of how they use their body when lying. In so doing, you’ll acquire insight into how they lie and you’ll be able glimpse the inner workings of their mind and the mannerisms displayed when doing so.

Depth: When debating, you should observe the comprehensiveness of an argument. In essence, listen for that which is not stated that could prove to be a benefit to your position.

When you negotiate, you should listen for the unspoken word, observe body language, and take note of how unspoken words are used (this is not an oxymoron). In a lot of negotiation situations, that which is not said can speak more loudly than the words that are spoken. You should also take note of words used that could contain dual meanings. Keep in mind when negotiating, just because someone offers a comprehensive rebuttal to a request, doesn’t mean you have to subjugate your position to theirs.

Breadth: When debating, give consideration to whether the argument covers all of the possibilities.

When you negotiate, initially, you should not display your full intentions until you’re somewhat sure that you can get that which you seek from the negotiation. In essence, you cannot allow yourself to become enveloped in a haze when it comes to disclosing your intent of the negotiation less you lose your negotiation advantage.

Logic: When debating you should consider the impact of fallacies in an argument.

When negotiating, a good negotiator can make a plausible argument using false or invalid inferences, the purpose of which may be to heighten the appearance of red herrings. It thus behooves you to be very cognizant throughout all phases of the negotiation.

When negotiating, the more strategies and techniques you’re aware of, and can utilize during negotiations, the better you’ll be at negotiating … and everything will be right with the world.

The Negotiation Lessons are …

– Before negotiating, consider the tactics you’ll employ. Proper planning will give you an additional edge as the negotiation progresses.

– Understand the illusion and value that red herrings can create. When used effectively, they create the opportunity to give something that has perceived value to the person with whom you’re negotiating, but that which has little value to you.

– When negotiating, as is the case when debating, a synchronized plan, aligned with the path that you’ll take to achieve the outcome of the negotiation you seek, will allow you the insight of more maneuverability throughout the negotiation.

1 5 6 7 8 9 20